L2 writing education: Does “far” transfer of learning outcomes occur, and can it be promoted?

1. L2 writing education: Does “far” transfer of learning outcomes occur, and can it be promoted? Mark Andrew James Arizona State University

2. Background • University ESL writing courses are meant to lead to learning outcomes that students will apply in (or transfer to) their other courses. • However, the writing required in an ESL writing course can differ (e.g., in the way source texts are used [Leki & Carson, 1997]) from the writing required in other courses. • This mismatch means that there appears to be an expectation in ESL writing education for “far” transfer of learning outcomes.

3. Research questions • Will learning outcomes from an ESL writing course transfer to a writing task with characteristics very different from the kind of writing done in the ESL writing course but typical of the kind of writing required in other academic courses (i.e., involving text-responsible writing)? • Can learning transfer in this situation be promoted by asking students to look for similarities between the writing task and the ESL writing course?

4. The participants (N=30) • 80% were in their first year of university study. • The average age was 21. • 57% were male and 43% were female. • They represented 13 different nationalities, the most common being Indian (6 participants), Taiwanese (4), Korean (4), and Chinese (3). • Their major areas of study were in business (15 participants), liberal arts and sciences (9), engineering (5). (One participant had not yet declared a major.)

5. The ESL writing course • 4 sections of a 1-semester, 3-credit freshman ESL writing course. (4 instructors, all experienced TAs.) • Goal: “to introduce students to the importance of writing in the work of the university and to develop their critical reading, thinking and writing skills so that they can successfully participate in that work”. • Main course assignments: 4 multi-draft compositions, none of which involved text-responsible writing. • Textbook: The St.Martin’s guide to writing

6. Data collection • A 2-week period after the middle of the semester. • Each student completed (individually, out of class): • a 40-minute writing task; • a 15-minute interview; • a 1-page background questionnaire.

7. The writing task Biotechnology: The smell of wealth A North Carolina State University scientist has developed a simple method for processing animal waste, which may lead to productive uses for some of the 500 million tons of poultry and livestock waste produced in the United States each year. (... the article continues and is about 450 words long ...) Questions: -- What is thermophilic anaerobic digestion? -- Why is it an important biotechnology? (Demonstrate your understanding by describing and discussing this phenomenon.)

8. The writing task … But first … Try to think of similarities between this writing task and the writing tasks or assignments you do in your COMP107 class. Write down 4 similarities here: 1. 2. 3. 4. After you have written down 4 similarities, read the article and answer the questions.

9. Data collection • A 2-week period after the middle of the semester. • Each student completed (individually, out of class): • a 40-minute text-responsible writing task; • a 15-minute interview; • a 1-page background questionnaire.

10. Data collection • A 2-week period after the middle of the semester. • Each student completed (individually, out of class): • a 40-minute text-responsible writing task; • a 15-minute interview; • a 1-page background questionnaire. • Students also submitted a copy of their most recent graded assignment from the ESL writing course.

11. Data analysis 1. Two raters examined each piece of writing (from the writing task and the ESL writing course assignment) for the use of 15 strategies. • 6 content-related strategies (e.g., exemplifying; comparing/contrasting) • 5 organization-related strategies (e.g., using cueing statements; using connectives) • 4 language-related strategies (e.g., avoiding fused sentences; avoiding sentence fragments)

12. Data analysis Example of rubric for examining use of writing strategies: Strategy 10: Using connectives (i.e., temporal [e.g., when], spatial [e.g., there], and/or logical [e.g., however] transitions) 1 = No use 2 = Minimal use (e.g., one word used in only one or two places) 3 = Moderate use (e.g., two or three different words used, in several places;) 4 = Extensive use (e.g., multiple words used, throughout the text)

13. Data analysis 1. Two raters examined each piece of writing (from the writing task and the ESL writing course assignment) for the use of 15 strategies. • 6 content-related strategies (e.g., exemplifying; comparing/contrasting) • 5 organization-related strategies (e.g., using cueing statements; using connectives) • 4 language-related strategies (e.g., avoiding fused sentences; avoiding sentence fragments) 2. I coded the interview transcripts for evidence of learning transfer.

14. Research question 1 Did learning outcomes from the ESL writing course transfer to the writing task? ...

15. Research question 1: Interview data • In the interviews, 13 of the 30 students (i.e., 43%) said that they had made a conscious effort to use learning outcomes from COMP107 to do the writing task. Of these, 7 (i.e., 23% of total) referred to writing strategies. Example of a report of transfer: Researcher: For this activity, did you try to use any of the skills or strategies or things you have learned or practiced in [COMP107]? Participant: Actually, yes. I used some transition words like “however”, “although”, “also”. Some of those skills, like, not that much, to only maintain the essay.

16. Research question 1: Writing sample data

17. Research question 1: Writing sample data

18. Research question 1: Writing sample data

19. Research question 2 Was learning transfer promoted by asking students to look for similarities between the writing task and the ESL writing course? …

20. Research question 2: Interview data • Groups were compared using a Chi-square test: • Group 1(i.e., students who had not been asked to look for similarities) vs. Group 2 (i.e., students who had been asked to look for similarities), for reported learning transfer. • There was no significant difference between the groups.

21. Research question 2: Writing sample data COMP107 assignment Writing task

22. Research question 2: Writing sample data COMP107 assignment Writing task

23. Summary • Far transfer of learning outcomes did occur from the ESL writing course; but, this transfer was constrained: • some students tried to use learning outcomes from the ESL writing course to do the writing task; others did not. • some writing strategies (particularly those related to language use and those hinted at in the task instructions) transferred readily to the writing task; others (i.e., many of those related to content and organization) did not. • Asking students to look for task similarities did not stimulate transfer of learning outcomes.

24. Implications • L2 writing practitioners may be encouraged that far transfer of learning outcomes from an ESL writing course can occur. They may also feel cautious because this transfer is not inevitable. • L2 writing researchers may investigate questions like: • How far will learning outcomes from a L2 writing course transfer? • Do some learning outcomes from a L2 writing course transfer more readily than others? • Both groups may be interested in the question of whether far transfer of learning outcomes can be stimulated.

25. Thank you! ...